Linguistic and metaphoric analysis of anger proverbs in Persian and Turkish languages
Subject Areas : azari (turkish) language and literatureBehrouz Ebrahimi 1 , Hayat Ameri 2 , Zahra Aَbolhasani Chimeh 3
1 - Ph.D Candidate of linguistics Department, Science and research branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2 - Assistant Professor of linguistics , Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
3 - Associate Professor of Linguistics department, Samt, Tehran, Iran.
Keywords: anger, proverb, cognitive linguistics, cognitive semantics, conceptual metaphor, mapping, Emotions and Emotions,
Abstract :
The present study examines the conceptual metaphors of anger in the rituals of both Persian and Turkish proverbs. This study attempts to extract and collect the required data from 9 sources for both languages. By searching the sources, 28 proverbs in the field of anger and 19 mappings were found in these proverbs. It was also attempted to list the most frequent mappings in both languages, discretely and separately. Along with mapping, the most frequent source domains were also identified and introduced to determine which speakers of these two languages were most likely to use the mapping and source domains to express anger metaphorically. In Farsi, it was found that mapping "anger is fire" and in Turkish, mapping "anger is ignorance / ignorance" were the most frequent. Regarding the source domains, the most frequent ones used to conceptualize anger are the "light and dark" source domains in the Persian language, and the "human / human body" in the Turkish language, respectively, and the frequency of occurrence was in each of the progenitors. Performed Analyses suggest that although some speakers of the two languages use a single cultural pattern to produce anger metaphor, cultural differences also appear to produce different mappings.
کتابها
- افراشی، آزیتا(1390)، نگاهی به تاریخچۀ مطالعات استعاره، در استعاره مبنای تفکر و ابزار زیباییآفرینی، تهران: سوره مهر.
مجلات
- گلفام، ارسلان و یوسفی راد (1381)، «زبان شناسی شناختی و استعاره»، تازههای علومشناختی، صص 59-64
- رضایی، محمد و نرجس مقیمی (1394)، «بررسی استعارههای مفهومی در ضربالمثلهای فارسی»، مطالعات زبانی بلاغی، سال چهارم، ش هشتم، صص 116-91
- ذوالفقاری، حسن (1386)، «بازتاب مسائل اجتماعی در ضربالمثلهای فارسی»، نشریۀ نجوای فرهنگ، ش 3، صص 24-15.
- ذوالفقاری، حسن (1387)، «تفاوت کنایه با ضربالمثل»، پژوهشهای زبان و ادبیات فارسی، ش 10، صص 133-109.
- روشن، بلقیس، فاطمه یوسفی راد و فاطمه شعبانیان (1392)،«مبنای طرح وارهای استعارههای موجود در ضربالمثلهای شرق گیلان»، زبانشناخت، سال چهارم، ش دوم، صص 75-94.
- نوین، حسین (1387)، «بررسی و تبیین ساختار اجتماعی – فرهنگی ضربالمثلهای ترکی استان اردبیل»، نشریۀ دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، دورۀ جدید، ش 23
پایاننامهها
- حقیقی، مهری(1395)، «بررسی تطبیقی ضربالمثلهای کردی کرمانشاهی و فارسی از منظر معنیشناسیشناختی»، پایاننامۀ کارشناسی ارشد، دانشکدۀ ادبیات و زبانهای خارجی، دانشگاه الزهرا (س).
- رضایی، حدائق (1382)، «استعاره در زبان فارسی بر اساس زبانشناسی شناختی»، پایاننامۀ کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه اصفهان، دانشکدۀ زبانهای خارجی.
- مؤمنی، شهناز (1395)،«تحلیل مقابلهای استعارۀ مفهومی در ضربالمثلهای فارسی و فرانسه»، پایاننامۀ کارشناسی ارشد، دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه سمنان.
منابع لاتین
- Evans, Vyvyan & Melanie Green (2006). "Cognitive linguistics, an introduction", Edinburg University Press.
- Evans, Vyvyan (2007). "A glossary of cognitive linguistics". Edinburg University Press.
- Geeraerts, Dirk (2010). "Diachronic Prototype Semantics". Oxford Clarendon Press.
- Kovecses, Z, (2000). "Metaphor and emotion: language, culture, and body in human feeling". Cambridge university press.
- Kovecses, Z, (2000). "Metaphor, a practical introduction". Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Lakoff, G. (1987). "Woman, fire, and dangerous things". the university of Chicago
- Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
- Retová, D. (2008). "Analysis of conceptual metaphors of selected emotions in Slovak language". [Diploma thesis]. – University of Comenius in Bratislava. Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics.
- Riemer, Nick (2010). "Introducing semantics". Cambridge university press.
- Sharifian, F. (2011). Cultural conceptualizations and language: theoretical framework and applications. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
- Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol. 2.Cambridge, MIT Press.
- Barcelona, Antonio. (2000). Introduction: the cognitive theory of metaphor and metonymy. In A. Barcelona "metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: a cognitive perspective" pp 1-28, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Barcelona, Antonio (2001). "On the systematic contrastive analysis of conceptual metaphors: case studiesand proposed methodology". eds.M. Pütz & et al. AppliedCognitive Linguistics II: Language Pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 117-146.
- Kobia, M. J. (2016). "A conceptual metaphorical analysis of Swahili proverbs with reference to chicken metaphor". International Journal of Education and Research. Vol. 4. No. 2.
- Kobia, M. J. (2010). Metaphor and Culture. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Philologica. 2, 2 (2010). Pp. 197-220.
- White, G.M. (1987). "Proverbs and cultural models: an American psychology of problem solving", cultural models in language and thought. eds. Holland, D. & Naomi Quinn. Cambridge university press. Pp. 151-172
- Zolfaghari, H. & Hayat Ameri (2012). "Persian Proverbs: Definitions and Characteristics". Journal of Islamic and Human Advanced Research 2. pp. 93-108.
- AGİŞ, Fazıla Derya (2007). "A comparative cognitive pragmatic approach to the Judeo-Spanish and Turkish proverbs and idioms that express emotions ". Hacettepe University Graduate School of Social Sciences English Linguistics. Master's Thesis, Ankara.
_||_